I hated when they traded Seymour because I always felt as if he was the most important part of the D. However, I was willing to take a wait and see approach. So far we have definitely been on the short end of the deal but it all depends in the long run on how Nate turns out. Still it would have been nice to have Richard around for the past few years. I really wonder how last year would have turned out if we had him.

Mark Anderson is on pace for 10 sacks and Brady is on pace for 58 touchdowns and 7077 yards. 3 games is a really small sample. I really don't think Seymour would re-sign he had beef with Belichick supposedly about coming out on 3rd down or something like that. And he wanted BIG money. If he becomes a free agent he isn't resigning here. Seymour is a great player and all but, I still believe trading him was the best option. It comes down to this, with or without seymour they don't win the super bowl in 09. Only other option I see is maybe they sign vince earlier and franchise tag seymour last year.

This has to go down as a bad trade. Nothing to do with solder we always could traded up to get him with all the bust 3rd and 2nd we blew, after seymour left we lost attitude in the DL. He used to be a bad az and bully on the dline.He is not only tough but someone who other teams OL do not push around.I remember so many games he was a nightmare due to his mental makeup.

We still are looking for attitude on the DL. shawn ellis has other than that nothing.ellis is too new. Every good DL in the league has attitude and a bad mother in the middle pushing and shoving , seymour was our instigator.

1.) As pointed out in the article, there was a good chance that Seymour would have left after the 2009 season because the Pats weren't going to be able or not willing to pay both him and Wilfork. So comparing what he could have done over the last two years might not be a fair comparison in evaluating the trade because he might have been gone in 2010 no matter if he was traded or not.
2.) Seymour isn't likely to get 14 sacks or even double digit sacks. He got two sacks vs. the Broncos who are in the top 10 in sacks allowed. He was also sacked 5 times in that game. So the Broncos just had troubles with protection that game. In the last two games, he has had 0.5 sacks coming against the Jets who are the eight most sacked team in the league.

We took an L on this. No matter how good Solder becomes, Seymour would have made a huge difference on our defense last year. No way the Jets go marching down the field with Seymour in our lineup.

Last year should have been the 4th ring for our team and we'd be in a better position this year for a 5th.

Click to expand...

Really? So the Pats don't trade him, they franchise Wilfork, and Seymour leaves in free agency and plays for another team last year; he would have made a difference on the Pats defense last year? So the Pats would have won the Super Bowl if he was playing for the Jets last year instead of the Raiders?

Sorry, people forget that that if the Pats didn't trade him, there was at least a decent chance he would have only stuck around one more year and been gone before last season. The Pats weren't likely to pay him last year and he would have gotten a Julius Peppers type of deal on the free market.

In his final years here,Seymour was not a difference maker on this team and was frequently injured weeks at a time.

Maybe he just fits in as a Raider than he was here for some reason.

I don't think his presence was all that huge after the 2005 season and I really don't think he would have been a destructive force had he been here now.
Some people live on the early years of Seymour when he was that all pro wrecking ball.....he left here as a shallow of that player.

I don't miss him all that much and our defense would still suck ass right now,even with him on the line...there are more problems with this D than just adding a player in his 30s to it.

If you keep Seymour to 2010, whose contract do you want to rip up? Brady's or Wilfork's?

Click to expand...

I don't know if they would have needed to rip up the contract of anyone, but there was little chance that they were going to have two of the highest paid d-linemen in the league. That's what it would have took to keep Seymour and his injury history and lowered production from his All Pro days obviously had the Patriots thinking he wasn't worth it.

Seymour is still a very good d-lineman, but he is no longer an elite d-lineman. The Raiders are paying him elite money and the Pats probably would have had to do it too.

In his final years here,Seymour was not a difference maker on this team and was frequently injured weeks at a time.

Maybe he just fits in as a Raider than he was here for some reason.

I don't think his presence was all that huge after the 2005 season and I really don't think he would have been a destructive force had he been here now.
Some people live on the early years of Seymour when he was that all pro wrecking ball.....he left here as a shallow of that player.

I don't miss him all that much and our defense would still suck ass right now,even with him on the line...there are more problems with this D than just adding a player in his 30s to it.

Click to expand...

Seymour hasn't been all that great with the Raiders either. He had a very good year last year and a decent year in 2009.

If Seymour was playing for the Pats like he's playing for the Raiders now, we would have never let him go. Problem was that he was a bit injury prone and not as consistent as before. Yes in hindsight maybe it would have been better to extend Seymour and franchise Wilfork, but those are the tough decisions you have to make. Can't get them all right. And I'm not sure we could have afforded Seymour and Wilfork at the same time even if we wanted to.

LOL! I guess I missed the memo where the league considered him an elite d-lineman. The players voted him #66 of the top 100 players in 2010 (in between Vonte Leach at 65 and Brian Waters at 67) . He was the eleventh d-lineman ranked. They had Justin Tuck (60), Tamba Hali (64), and Robert Mathis (57) ranked higher than him and I don't consider any of the elite. That makes him in the very good category not elite. I think the players agree with me.

Right now, he is the highest paid d-lineman in the league and the league doesn't consider him top 10.

If you keep Seymour to 2010, whose contract do you want to rip up? Brady's or Wilfork's?

Click to expand...

Neither. There was no cap in 2010 and if they'd signed Vince early, which it seems they don't like to do so much anymore, his cap hit this year would likely be substantially less than the 4.65 mil it is. In any event they're $10.5 mil under the cap for 2011.